The General Concept and Definition of Philosophy - Mi …

This semidualist, liberal and unitarist position is more or less logically sound, but cannot eliminate the problem of all theodicies accepting the (hyper-) goodness of God. Understanding the truth of suffering excludes accepting vague explanations about why so much evil is going on. Why does God not intervene ? Even a human father would not allow his children to play with a smoking gun. So why would God ? Perhaps Sartre was right : the presence of suffering is the best proof no "good" or "hyper-good" God exists (cf., 2005). This may leads into the obscurity of inclusive wickedness and the acceptance of the Devil as the lowest degree of God, making diabolical sadism like the Holocaust the expression of the wickedness, cruelty and perversion of God Himself ! Clearly no clear concept of Divinity is possible if this is allowed.

Being mindful of Ockham's Raizor, we may ask whether natural causes, abuse of free will and its solidification not suffice to explain evil ? Is the massive amount of evil just the outcome of natural (including non-human agents of chaos) & cultural causes ? If so, then theodicy is superfluous, for evil is nature-made and man-made. Natural evil is the result of a wide range of determinations, and depends on material conditions. Cultural evil increases entropy, triggering degeneration, decomposition & destruction. Solidifying these acts of will in ego-systems and their processes is "diabolical". But as they depend on conditions, they too can be reversed.

The Definition of Art (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

A dictionary of philosophical concepts using definitions by genus and differentia

The definition of art is controversial in contemporary philosophy

A third sort of argument, more historically inflected than the first,takes off from an influential study by the historian of philosophyPaul Kristeller, in which he argued that the modern system of the fivemajor arts [painting, sculpture, architecture, poetry, and music]which underlies all modern aesthetics … is of comparativelyrecent origin and did not assume definite shape before the eighteenthcentury, although it had many ingredients which go back to classical,mediaeval, and Renaissance thought. Since that list of five arts issomewhat arbitrary, and since even those five do not share a singlecommon nature, but rather are united, at best, only by severaloverlapping features, and since the number of art forms has increasedsince the eighteenth century, Kristeller’s work may be taken tosuggest that our concept of art differs from that of the eighteenthcentury. As a matter of historical fact, there simply is no stabledefiniendum for a definition of art to capture.

Whether art can be defined has also been a matter of controversy

A fourth sort of argument suggests that a definition of art statingindividually necessary and jointly sufficient conditions for a thing tobe an artwork, is likely to be discoverable only if cognitive sciencemakes it plausible to think that humans categorize things in terms ofnecessary and sufficient conditions. But, the argument continues,cognitive science actually supports the view that the structure ofconcepts mirrors the way humans categorize things—which is withrespect to their similarity to prototypes (or exemplars), and not interms of necessary and sufficient conditions. So the quest for adefinition of art that states individually necessary and jointlysufficient conditions is misguided and not likely to succeed (Dean2003). Against this it has been urged that psychological theoriesof concepts like the prototype theory and its relatives can provide atbest an account of how people in fact classify things, but notan account of correct classifications of extra-psychologicalphenomena, and that, even if relevant, prototype theory and otherpsychological theories of concepts are at present too controversial todraw substantive philosophical morals from (Rey 1983; Adajian 2005).

Philosophy - definition of philosophy by The Free …
The term ubuntu appears in South African sources from as early as the mid-19th century

Postmodernism and modern philosophy

A final caveat is the inevitable gap that arises between theories and practices in religions. As has been noted, even societies with religious traditions which appear sympathetic to the environment have in the past often misused resources. While it is clear that religions may have some disjunction between the ideal and the real, this should not lessen our endeavor to identify resources from within the world’s religions for a more ecologically sound cosmology and environmentally supportive ethics. This disjunction of theory and practice is present within all philosophies and religions and is frequently the source of disillusionment, skepticism, and cynicism. A more realistic observation might be made, however, that this disjunction should not automatically invalidate the complex worldviews and rich cosmologies embedded in traditional religions. Rather, it is our task to explore these conceptual resources so as to broaden and expand our own perspectives in challenging and fruitful ways.

Concepts are of central importance to an overall theory of cognition and the mind

Philosophy dictionary definition | philosophy defined

Spurred on by Arendt's work, and dissatisfied with analyses of evilfound in the history of philosophy, several theorists over the pasttwenty-five years have sought to offer necessary and sufficientconditions for evil. Some theorists focus on evil character, or evilpersonhood, as the root concept of evil. These theorists consider theconcept of evil action to be a derivative concept, i.e., they definean evil action as the sort of action that an evil person performs. Butjust as many theorists, or more, believe that the concept of evilaction is the root concept of evil. These theorists consider theconcept of evil personhood to be a derivative concept, i.e., theydefine an evil person as someone who is prone to perform evilactions. Some theorists who believe that evil action is the rootconcept believe that only one or two component properties areessential for evil action, while others believe that evil action has amultitude of essential components. This section discusses differentviews about the essential components of evil action.

Philosophy is a set of ideals, standards or beliefs used to describe behavior and thought.

General Adaptation Syndrome: Stages, Definition & …

A seventh argument against defining art, with a normative tinge thatis psychologistic rather than sociopolitical, takes the fact thatthere is no philosophical consensus about the definition of art asreason to hold that no unitary concept of art exists. Concepts ofart, like all concepts, after all, should be used for the purpose(s)they best serve. But not all concepts of art serve all purposesequally well. So not all art concepts should be used for the samepurposes. Art should be defined only if there is a unitary concept ofart that serves all of art’s various purposes—historical,conventional, aesthetic, appreciative, communicative, and so on. So,since there is no purpose-independent use of the concept of art, artshould not be defined (Mag Uidhir and Magnus 2011; cf. Meskin 2008).In response, it is noted that an account of what makes variousconcepts of art concepts of art is still required, whichleaves open the possibility of important commonalities. The fact (ifit is one) that different concepts of art are used for differentpurposes does not itself imply that they are not connected insystematic, ordered ways. The relation between (say) the historicalconcept of art and the appreciative concept of art is not anaccidental, unsystematic relation, like that between river banks andsavings banks, but is something like the relation between Socrates’healthiness and the healthiness of Socrates’ diet. That is, it is notevident that there exist a multiplicity of art concepts, constitutingan unsystematic patchwork. Perhaps there is a single concept of artwith different facets that interlock in an ordered way, or else amultiplicity of concepts that constitute a unity because one is at thecore, and the others depend on it, but not conversely. (The last is aninstance of core-dependent homonymy; see the entry on , section on Essentialismand Homonymy.) Multiplicity alone doesn’t entail pluralism.